some ways is as important as content (Goldfarb 2006). It is not, as some have
claimed, a reformation or a transformation or a new kind of magic but it is, I think,
a significant addition to the affective cartography of the world, not least because
it allows biological fields to take shape at-a-distance in new ways.^49
And, as I have pointed out above, this is about cartography. But the problem
is that we have only a limited range of models that capture spaces of imitation and
invention (Thrift 2006a) and which will allow us too think about how we might
ventilate politics, to use Sloterdijk’s term. But I think a new and fertile ground is
now emerging in which the practices of affect might be better understood and
worked with, and that ground lies at the intersection of performance and
technology in the reinvention of various spatial crafts (Gough and Wallis 2005).
But that is for another book.
254 Part III